Upper Ozone Depletion Declining

Silas writes "This SF Chronicle article (and many others) reports that destruction of the upper part of Earth's ozone layer has slowed because of the international effort more than a decade ago to ban ozone-damaging aerosols. More about the study and techniques used is here. We're still a long way away from recovery, but it's a nice example of humans taking an active role in reversing some of the damage we've done."

Comments

OR....

[Picass0]

Could it just be that with our very limited (~40 years worth) sample of scientific data that we just do not have a very good understanding of how the cycles of the Ozone Layer work? Perhaps ozone holes occur and disappear naturally, and we are only beginning to learn this. Ozone is created every time lighting strikes the earth (about 100 time every second) so ozone is not something that goes away forever.

Re:OR....

[DavidTC]

Have you even ever looked at how CFCs are claimed to work? Check it out, it's completely nonsensical.

All the crappy science out there will talk about how ozone is 'destroyed', when, of course, CFCs are just turning it into O2, which is all that's up there to start with, sans radiation.

And there's plenty of proof the ozone layer doesn't fucking care...strip away some ozone, more radiation will get through, it will hit O2, and you'll get more O3 to stop the radiation. Duh!

Meanwhile, there's plenty of evidence that ozone operates completely independently of anything we've ever done as humans. The thinning in the ozone layer is a rather obvious example, it's interesting how one of the largest gaps in the ozone layer is over a completely uninhabited section of the world. It's due to frickin ice particles.

And, as has been pointed out elsewhere, the ozone layer seems to follow directly behind the sunspot cycle.

Basically, things don't magically stay in balance until we humans release a few chemicals and destroy it. Yes, that can happen, but there's absolutely no evidence of that here. Yes, we might have temporarily altered some of the O2/O3 balance in the upper atmosphere...but, then again, we might not. Meanwhile, the tiny dent we may or may not have made is completely overbalanced by the fact the level of radiation from the sun alters all the time, and that is the main producer of ozone.

If our planet can withstand massive amounts of nitrogen, chloride, flouride, and bromide being belched from volcanos, then it can withstand a bottle of fucking hairspray.

But, hey, you're got 'solid evidence', so let's hear it.

Re:Simple, really....

[HaloZero]

It's cyclic.

Earth. Ozone layer allows birth and flourishment of homo sapiens.
Homo sapiens irradicate ozone layer through flourishment.
Loss of ozone layer results in irradication of homo sapien population.
Ozone layer returns gradually after eons of non-interference by now-extinct homo sapiens.

However, I do suppose this is excluding whatever damage the gradual decay of our structures and chemical shit (sun no longer stopped by now non-existant ozone - what will react?) will do to retard the reintroduction of the ozone layer after we're all long toasty.

Where's the link?

[DrPeper]

I don't remember ever seeing conclusive evidence (as in studies) that aerosol use was ever positively linked to the depletion of the ozone layer. In fact I remember several studies highlighted on the discovery channel which cast quite a bit of doubt on that that hypothesis.